The Bastardization of Collegiate Athletics
OK, I can understand the bowl games getting corporate sponsors, bigger audiences, national attention, yadda yadda yadda. But when a mere regular season game gets sponsored, how far are we from a professional sports model, every play of the game is sponsored by my company BS? If anything this validates the long held assumption that Michigan V. Ohio State is the best rivalry in sports.
Article Link
Article Link
Comments
Originally posted by Scott
I believe this to be self evident. The large sums of money in collegiate sports hurts the academic mission of the university.
that is complete and utter bullshit and i'd like to see you back that up rather than making a baseless blanket statement
Originally posted by Scott
Dexter Manly
You dug that one up from a while ago.
Moving on, it's obvious that most recruited college athletes are subpar academics. If recruiting athletic talent, which is guaranteed to secure money for the program (and for some schools in the form a large donations made by old, rich guys), means that the average inteligence level of the whole place goes down a notch, then I think that surely is the negative impact on the scholarly mission Scott talks about.
Now, there are sports like cross country and rowing where campus recruiters go around freshman week and find a bunch of warm bodies, but for every one of those there's a football, a baseball, an ice hockey, etc.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
You dug that one up from a while ago.
Moving on, it's obvious that most recruited college athletes are subpar academics. If recruiting athletic talent, which is guaranteed to secure money for the program (and for some schools in the form a large donations made by old, rich guys), means that the average inteligence level of the whole place goes down a notch, then I think that surely is the negative impact on the scholarly mission Scott talks about.
Now, there are sports like cross country and rowing where campus recruiters go around freshman week and find a bunch of warm bodies, but for every one of those there's a football, a baseball, an ice hockey, etc.
Duke
Harvard
Stanford
Cal
etc.
it's very insulting to college athletes to generalize them and say they have subpar academics. the average intelligence doesn't drop down. athlete does not equal stupid. nerds who were never athletic and jealous of the jocks make that assumption.
Both cross country and rowing are recruited sports at all the schools that compete at the high level of D1. The baseball team here at Cal has I think the 2nd highest GPA.
Smart schools have smart athletes. Admissions aren't that easy to get by. Yes the academic standard for recruited athletes is lower, but usually only slightly and for good reason. I can tell you from experience that it is near impossible to perform at the same level in the classroom as other students here. I'm just too busy and don't have the same time to put into my studies. That doesn't mean I lower the academic average though.
but i will say this. ask some folks who have to teach in atmospheres of large student athletic expectations, especially the big three (football, basketball, baseball). it's a parallel universe from the rest of the academic body, where normal rules do not apply.
Originally posted by applenut
Smart schools have smart athletes. Admissions aren't that easy to get by. Yes the academic standard for recruited athletes is lower, but . . .
I spent 4 years at Princeton, probably the most stellar example of building sports teams with good -but not great- students for the purpose of alumni donation. I was involved in the cross country and later the rugby team. I've seen plenty of student-athletes and plenty of athlete-students.
Here's a book for you to read: The Game of Life
The author is Bill Bowen, who has spent his life in academia on both the professorial and administrative sides. The book caused a lot of controversy when it came out a few years ago, but in the end it is leading to what is seeming to be a unilateral de-jocking of the ivies.
Really the crux of the matter is that you have people who identify their mission in college as "being a good softball catcher" without any real focus on utilizing the academic resources of the institution. This is touched in the book above.
If you take two priveleged youths with decent grades in high school, and there's a stellar football player with an 1150 SAT, and there's also a pretty damn good football player with a 1350, the idea is that the latter will still have opportunities to add some personal diversity to a high-end school, and can be a valuable asset to the school, but that statistics show that the former is not likely to add much at all. Statistics will even show that neither candidate will be within the standard deviation of academic progress.
By claiming the contrary, applenut, you are going against what has become a fairly standard -- and accepted -- point of view that is backed by diversely populated mathematical models. The fact that it's statisically shown that kids who spend at least as much time working for one of many various extracurricular organizations (Say daily nespaper) as any football player spends practising consistently put up better academic figures is somewhat contrary to your claim as well. Yes, both are lower than the overall mean, but there's a big gap between ice-hockey player and night-editor.
Originally posted by DanMacMan
I believe, as do many, that if collegiate athletics are going in this direction (which for all intents and purposes they are) then at the very least, the athletes should be paid in some manner. I suggest something like a monthly stipend of $100, just to get by on. Is that not fair? The Universities make millions off of the athletes and they get, besides a free education, relatively nothing. It's the right thing to do.
I don't get a free education
the majority of student-athletes are NOT on scholarship.
I did witness first-hand a handfull of elite players for my college and others since, whom I know first hand receive everything from jobs to cars and in one instance a freaking house. What I dont recall is there being any sort of investigation or even complaints from others not receiving this sort of attention. I believe that if you are legitimatly performing up to standards or better in school and are an elite athlete you should be able to reap the benefit of Alumni gifts or national sponsorships on a limited basis. The problems come in when there are point-shaving scandals associated with these monitary gifts. Its definatly a hot topic.
Originally posted by Playmaker
I feel strongly about this topic on many levels. I played basketball for an NAIA college in Missouri in the late 90's and (by smaller college standards) received special attention in certain areas. I was able to freely schedule classes that I needed or wanted with the benefit of not having to wait in a line or worry about weather or not I could "get into a class". I remember specifically the first week of my freshman year one of the coaches walking me up to the front of the line for a Human Anatomy class and seeing the expressions of the dozens of people standing there, who obviously didnt like the special treatment. On the other hand in retrospect I could have in no way gone to the two-a-day prcatices and work out secessions if I didnt get this treatment. I later transfered to the University of New Orleans and can remember standing in a line to sign up for a class for an hour only to find out it was the wrong damn line.
I did witness first-hand a handfull of elite players for my college and others since, whom I know first hand receive everything from jobs to cars and in one instance a freaking house. What I dont recall is there being any sort of investigation or even complaints from others not receiving this sort of attention. I believe that if you are legitimatly performing up to standards or better in school and are an elite athlete you should be able to reap the benefit of Alumni gifts or national sponsorships on a limited basis. The problems come in when there are point-shaving scandals associated with these monitary gifts. Its definatly a hot topic.
1. as you said. it's neccessary to have primary enrollment in order to schedule classes around practice times. otherwise athletes would not be able to schedule their days easily and correctly. I can only take classes during certain hours. I better get into those because I can't take them at another time. do people complain that disabled people get priority enrollment as well?
2. Well, you're college is breaking NCAA rules and that's sad. Cal has become so violation fearful that we are not allowed to even order gear unless everyone on the team wants the same piece of gear.
Originally posted by applenut
1. as you said. it's neccessary to have primary enrollment in order to schedule classes around practice times. otherwise athletes would not be able to schedule their days easily and correctly. I can only take classes during certain hours. I better get into those because I can't take them at another time. do people complain that disabled people get priority enrollment as well?
2. Well, you're college is breaking NCAA rules and that's sad. Cal has become so violation fearful that we are not allowed to even order gear unless everyone on the team wants the same piece of gear.
Not sure whats happening there these days, as this was almost 8 years ago. It was interesting to see how people reacted to these things. It was a hush hush situation but when someone who has no job and comes from a moderatly poor background I'm not sure how you keep a new car a hush hush item. I think most people including myself accepted this activity as reward-like and never thought twice about it. The car (A new mustang) appeared after the player in question got national player of the week for the second time that season. Much more attention was payed to the few fortunate athletes who were given a campus job for checking on the automatic sprinkelers that watered the soccer field.
I actually had a job when I was a freshman the required me to watch the switchboard in the student union office on Sunday when it was closed (=2 hours of sleep in an office every sunday durring the off season).
Link.